What happened to them?

[paarsurrey]

ncgolf; 2716944:

Well the NT has another recording of the dead rising and going amongst the living. Lazarus rose from the dead and came out of the tomb. It doesn’t mention whether he talked or not but he did continue to live I assume and then died again at an older age… though Scripture makes no more mention of what happened to Lazarus.

Was Lazarus’s rising symbolic or was he once dead and brought back?

Hi

It is only, in my opinion, the superstition of my friends that they insist taking "Lazarus rose from the dead “ as literally. It is no secret that JesusYeshuaIssa used to talk in parables, so should his disciples, as the disciples inculcate the habits of the master naturally.

It is most probable that it was just metaphorical/symbolical, it was not the real dead who were raised, so later they died a natural death (more accurately that would not be a natural death, as that had already happened, this could only be termed as an unnatural death, needs proving).

The ‘dead’ might have meant the most spoiled persons who would have improved with the teachings of Jesus. This is not a small thing, but a miracle of high order.

Another interpretation is that with Jesus’ herbal medical knowledge and his prayers, the near-dead persons whom the doctors/physicians would have declared not curable had been cured by Jesus. This is a very miraculous thing on its own merit.

This is what I believe; others may differ with me but with rational and reasonable arguments.

Thanks

 

[Techno2000]

From the The Dolorous Passion of Our Lord Jesus Christ From the Meditations of Anne Catherine Emmerich. The Sorrowful (Dolorous) Passion of Our Lord Jesus Christ are the visions of Anne Catherine Emmerich concerning the horrific sufferings Jesus Christ. These include the trial, scourging, crucifixtion, burial and what happened after Jesus’s death… the last one addresses your post. I include only some excerpts that directly address your post.

“The priests were endeavouring to continue the sacrifices, when suddenly an unexpected and most appalling pause ensued; terror and astonishment were depicted on each countenance; all was thrown into confusion; not a sound was heard; the sacrifices ceased; there was a general rush to the gates of the Temple; everyone endeavoured to fly as quickly as possible. And well might they fly, well might they fear and tremble; for in the midst of the multitude there suddenly appeared persons who had been dead and buried for many years! These persons looked at them sternly, and reproved them most severely for the crime they had committed that day, in bringing about the death of ‘the just man,’ and calling down his blood upon their heads.”

A little later this passage, “Whilst these things were going on in the Temple, the confusion and panic were not less in Jerusalem. Dead persons were walking about, and many walls and buildings had been shaken by the earthquake, and parts of them fallen down. The superstition of Pilate rendered him even more accessible to fear; he was perfectly paralysed and speechless with terror; his palace was shaken to the very foundation, and the earth quaked beneath his feet. The Zacharias here referred to was the father of John the Baptist, who was tortured and afterwards put to death by Herod, because he would not betray John into the hands of the tyrant. He was buried by his friends within the precincts of the Temple. He ran wildly from room to room, and the dead constantly stood before him, reproaching him with the unjust sentence he had passed upon Jesus.”

In the streets of Jerusalem, “More than a hundred persons who had died at different epochs re-entered the bodies they had occupied when on earth, made their appearance in different parts of Jerusalem, and filled the inhabitants with inexpressible consternation. Those souls which had been released by Jesus from Limbo uncovered their faces and wandered to and fro in the streets, and although their bodies were the same as those which they had animated when on earth, yet these bodies did not appear to touch the ground as they walked. They entered the houses of their descendants, proclaimed the innocence of Jesus, and reproved those who had taken
part in his death most severely. I saw them passing through the principal streets; they were generally in couples, and appeared to me to glide through the airs without moving their feet. The countenances of some were pale; others of a yellow tint; their beards were long, and their voices sounded strange and sepulchral. Their grave-clothes were such as it was customary to use at the period of their decease. When they reached the place where
sentence of death was proclaimed on Jesus before the procession started for Calvary, they paused for a moment, and exclaimed in a loud voice: ‘Glory be to Jesus for ever and ever, and destruction to his enemies!’ Towards four o’clock all the dead returned to their graves. The sacrifices in the Temple had been so interrupted, and the confusion caused by the different prodigies was so great, that very few persons ate the Paschal lamb on that evening”

It’s almost like a scene from Night of the living Dead movie, love Anne Catherine Emmerich.

 

[Khalfan]

From the The Dolorous Passion of Our Lord Jesus Christ From the Meditations of Anne Catherine Emmerich. The Sorrowful (Dolorous) Passion of Our Lord Jesus Christ are the visions of Anne Catherine Emmerich concerning the horrific sufferings Jesus Christ. These include the trial, scourging, crucifixtion, burial and what happened after Jesus’s death… the last one addresses your post. I include only some excerpts that directly address your post.

“The priests were endeavouring to continue the sacrifices, when suddenly an unexpected and most appalling pause ensued; terror and astonishment were depicted on each countenance; all was thrown into confusion; not a sound was heard; the sacrifices ceased; there was a general rush to the gates of the Temple; everyone endeavoured to fly as quickly as possible. And well might they fly, well might they fear and tremble; for in the midst of the multitude there suddenly appeared persons who had been dead and buried for many years! These persons looked at them sternly, and reproved them most severely for the crime they had committed that day, in bringing about the death of ‘the just man,’ and calling down his blood upon their heads.”

A little later this passage, “Whilst these things were going on in the Temple, the confusion and panic were not less in Jerusalem. Dead persons were walking about, and many walls and buildings had been shaken by the earthquake, and parts of them fallen down. The superstition of Pilate rendered him even more accessible to fear; he was perfectly paralysed and speechless with terror; his palace was shaken to the very foundation, and the earth quaked beneath his feet. The Zacharias here referred to was the father of John the Baptist, who was tortured and afterwards put to death by Herod, because he would not betray John into the hands of the tyrant. He was buried by his friends within the precincts of the Temple. He ran wildly from room to room, and the dead constantly stood before him, reproaching him with the unjust sentence he had passed upon Jesus.”

In the streets of Jerusalem, “More than a hundred persons who had died at different epochs re-entered the bodies they had occupied when on earth, made their appearance in different parts of Jerusalem, and filled the inhabitants with inexpressible consternation. Those souls which had been released by Jesus from Limbo uncovered their faces and wandered to and fro in the streets, and although their bodies were the same as those which they had animated when on earth, yet these bodies did not appear to touch the ground as they walked. They entered the houses of their descendants, proclaimed the innocence of Jesus, and reproved those who had taken part in his death most severely. I saw them passing through the principal streets; they were generally in couples, and appeared to me to glide through the airs without moving their feet. The countenances of some were pale; others of a yellow tint; their beards were long, and their voices sounded strange and sepulchral. Their grave-clothes were such as it was customary to use at the period of their decease. When they reached the place where sentence of death was proclaimed on Jesus before the procession started for Calvary, they paused for a moment, and exclaimed in a loud voice: ‘Glory be to Jesus for ever and ever, and destruction to his enemies!’ Towards four o’clock all the dead returned to their graves. The sacrifices in the Temple had been so interrupted, and the confusion caused by the different prodigies was so great, that very few persons ate the Paschal lamb on that evening”

The Holy Spirit could have inspired any of the resurrected man to write a witness story, which might become the most sensational, most reliable, most authentical witness story ever written in the history of mankind. But unfortunatly, it never happened.

 

[ncgolf]

Hi

It is only, in my opinion, the superstition of my friends that they insist taking "Lazarus rose from the dead “ as literally. It is no secret that JesusYeshuaIssa used to talk in parables, so should his disciples, as the disciples inculcate the habits of the master naturally.

You must have some way of discerning literal from parable. Jesus’s parables were stories He told to a crowd to explain a concept. For example Jesus typically begins a parable with, “There was once a<Rich man, or Old woman, or you fill in the blank>”. The passage written about Lazarus was from the point of view of the writer … describing what Jesus said and did. Later in the passage the writer describes many conversions based on what Jesus did that day. No writings ever had Jesus as the center of a parable. His disciples always described what He did.

If the disciples told a story of something Jesus did and it was not true it would be a lie not a parable.

So what makes you think this is a parable, if it is because the claim of a person rising from the dead at Jesus’s command, is too large well then Christianity is all a parable since the crux of Christianity resides in Jesus indeed dying and resurrecting 3 days later. Lazarus’s story is not outside the realm of what Christian thought finds acceptable. Now if Jesus told Lazarus to rise and turn into a pink elephant then one could look at that with a great deal more skepticism.

 

[patg]

Well the NT has another recording of the dead rising and going amongst the living. Lazarus rose from the dead and came out of the tomb. It doesnt mention whether he talked or not but he did continue to live I assume and then died again at an older age … though Scripture makes no more mention of what happended to Lazarus.

Was Lazarus’s rising symbolic or was he once dead and brought back?

I believe it is symbolic. This would be, without a doubt, the greatest miracle ever - bringing someone back from beinbg really and very dead! How could such an incredible thing be totally ignored in all the epistles and all the other gospels…all of which were written well before John when the memory of the event would have been fresher? How could this person who was raised from the dead by Jesus himself not be the most revered person on earth (or at least in the early Christian community) and how could there never be another reference to this person?

Did he have to die all over again?

The fact that this is only mentioned in John’s gospel is not exactly a point in favor of its historicity. John was written very late and represents a view of Jesus so radically different from the other gospels that it hardly seems to be about the same person. The idea that John wrote about an event that didn’t happen does not in any way imply he is lying - all authors use fiction to teach powerful truths.

Again, we are free to interpret this as symbolic, historic, or both - the Church does not present a required interpretation. I see no way it can be literal history but you are free to believe otherwise. A good reference for the Church’s position on such things are the PBC documents: “Instruction on the Historical Truth of the Gospels” (a.k.a. “Sancta Mater Ecclesia”; April 21, 1964) and the analysis “The Biblical Commission’s Instruction on the Historical Truth of the Gospels” by Joseph A. Fitzmyer, S.J. (both available online).

 

[Isa_Almisry]

They rose body and soul, just like Lazarus.

Just like Lazarus (and unlike Christ), they had this body when they rose.

Just like Lazarus (and unlike Christ), they all died again.

The widows son raised by Elisha also died again, and the widow’s son raised by Christ died again.

And then, like Christ, they will rise again with the resurrected body in glory.

 

[Reepicheep]

To those who posted that the raising of hundreds of thousands, or of all the righteous dead, would have left more record:

Where in the gospel account does it say anything about “hundreds of thousands” rising? Or that “all the righteous dead” rose on this occasion?

To those who point out the lack of written accounts of this event:

In the first place, this was first-century Isreal, not twenty-first century North America. Most people didn’t read, and those that did were less inclined to make detailed records of every event.
In the second place, we do have one written account at least- the gospel itself.

 

[patg]

Where in the gospel account does it say anything about “hundreds of thousands” rising? Or that “all the righteous dead” rose on this occasion?

Matthew says: “The earth quaked, rocks were split, tombs were opened, and the bodies of many saints who had fallen asleep were raised. And coming forth from their tombs after his resurrection, they entered the holy city and appeared to many.”

Not “thousands” or “all” but certainly significant enough that someone else would have noticed. And certainly these living “saints” (and the many empty graves) would have been highly revered and remembered by the community.

In the first place, this was first-century Isreal, not twenty-first century North America. Most people didn’t read, and those that did were less inclined to make detailed records of every event.

That is true but this is far more significant than all the other much less powerful events which are mentioned in multiple writings. Even old Josephus left this one out.

In the second place, we do have one written account at least- the gospel itself.

One gospel. From a faith perspective, that is probably enough for some to believe it literally happened. From a historical perspective, that is pretty insignificant.

 

[dessert]

The Holy Spirit could have inspired any of the resurrected man to write a witness story, which might become the most sensational, most reliable, most authentical witness story ever written in the history of mankind. But unfortunatly, it never happened.

Don’t you believe in apparitions or ever seen or heard of ghosts(spirit) . Have you never heard from your guardian angel? Don’t you believe that an angel can talk to you? I suppose you do not believe you can pray with the intercession of the saints?
Desert

 

[dessert]

Hi

It is only, in my opinion, the superstition of my friends that they insist taking "Lazarus rose from the dead “ as literally. It is no secret that JesusYeshuaIssa used to talk in parables, so should his disciples, as the disciples inculcate the habits of the master naturally.

It is most probable that it was just metaphorical/symbolical, it was not the real dead who were raised, so later they died a natural death (more accurately that would not be a natural death, as that had already happened, this could only be termed as an unnatural death, needs proving).

The ‘dead’ might have meant the most spoiled persons who would have improved with the teachings of Jesus. This is not a small thing, but a miracle of high order.

Another interpretation is that with Jesus’ herbal medical knowledge and his prayers, the near-dead persons whom the doctors/physicians would have declared not curable had been cured by Jesus. This is a very miraculous thing on its own merit.

This is what I believe; others may differ with me but with rational and reasonable arguments.

Thanks

There was much magic in those days but Jesus did miracles and it had to be fantasic to be declared a miracl and sign or wonder, so what do you think with Moses rod be turned into a big snake was? I suppose you don’t believe it reallly was a snake?
Desert

 

[paarsurrey]

There was much magic in those days but Jesus did miracles and it had to be fantasic to be declared a miracl and sign or wonder, so what do you think with Moses rod be turned into a big snake was? I suppose you don’t believe it reallly was a snake?
Desert

Hi

It was an illusion, I think, not a real snake. A human being cannot create a thing which would mix up with the creation of GodAllahYHWH and has total resumblance with His creation, that is the point.

Thanks

 

[Nella]

Matthew 27:52 The tombs broke open and the bodies of many holy people who had died were raised to life.

What happened to them after? Where did they go?

Wal-Mart of course.

 

[inJESUS]

what we DO NOT know are:

How many were raised.
Whether they were in natural-but-mortal bodies (e.g. Lazarus), natural-but-immortal bodies (e.g. post-resurrection, pre-ascension Jesus), or supernatural/glorified bodies (e.g. post-ascension Jesus in Revelation).
How long they remained on earth (till Jesus ascended? Until they died?).
Whether they only appeared to believing Jews ( Acts 10.40-41) or anyone.
Why ALL the saints were not raised?

Obviously Matthew is not interested in satisfying our curiosity- neither does he want to give details of the event or anything. Putting in mind that Matthew’s audiance were Jews :

in a major section of Jewish thought of the day, the bodily resurrection of OT Jewish saints would occur when messiah come. They literally expected a bodily resurrection (like that in the passage under discussion) to occur at the revealing of the messiah…

So, in keeping with Matthew’s Jewish-oriented message, it explains one reason of why he records this action of the Messiah.

Quadratus, an very early 2nd century apologist (writing sometime between 117-138 ad) wrote:

“But our Savior’s works were permanent, for they were real. Those who had been cured or rose from the dead not only appeared to be cured or raised but were permanent, not only during our Savior’s stay on earth, but also after his departure. They remained for a considerable period, so that some of them even reached our times.”

Matthew’s second motive in adding verse 53 was the fulfillment of Scripture. The first part of Ezekiel 37:12-13 reads **“I will open your tombs,” **is paralleled in the third line of Matt 27:51-52, “And the tombs were opened.” But the Ezekiel passage continues: "And I will bring you up out of your tombs, and I will lead you into the land of Israel. Then you shall know that I am the Lord." in 27:53 the fulfillment of the rest of the Ezek passage: "And having come out from the tombs, . . . they entered into the holy city [of Jerusalem]." the last clause “and they were made visible to many,” from Isa 26:19 : "Those in the tombs shall be raised, and those in the land [or on the earth] shall rejoice."
. In apocalyptic language and imagery borrowed from Scripture he teaches that the death of Jesus and his resurrection (“raising”) marked the beginning of the last times and of God’s judgment…

from this analysis, it should be clear as to why it was not mentioned by Luke or Mark who were writing to the Gentiles who had no idea of any of this. It would not have been relevant to their literary purposes.Matthew, on the other hand, was writing to Jews using Jewish scripture.

 

[Khalfan]

what we DO NOT know are:

How many were raised.
Whether they were in natural-but-mortal bodies (e.g. Lazarus), natural-but-immortal bodies (e.g. post-resurrection, pre-ascension Jesus), or supernatural/glorified bodies (e.g. post-ascension Jesus in Revelation).
How long they remained on earth (till Jesus ascended? Until they died?).
Whether they only appeared to believing Jews ( Acts 10.40-41) or anyone.
Why ALL the saints were not raised?

Obviously Matthew is not interested in satisfying our curiosity- neither does he want to give details of the event or anything. Putting in mind that Matthew’s audiance were Jews :

in a major section of Jewish thought of the day, the bodily resurrection of OT Jewish saints would occur when messiah come. They literally expected a bodily resurrection (like that in the passage under discussion) to occur at the revealing of the messiah…

So, in keeping with Matthew’s Jewish-oriented message, it explains one reason of why he records this action of the Messiah.

Quadratus, an very early 2nd century apologist (writing sometime between 117-138 ad) wrote:

“But our Savior’s works were permanent, for they were real. Those who had been cured or rose from the dead not only appeared to be cured or raised but were permanent, not only during our Savior’s stay on earth, but also after his departure. They remained for a considerable period, so that some of them even reached our times.”

Matthew’s second motive in adding verse 53 was the fulfillment of Scripture. The first part of Ezekiel 37:12-13 reads **“I will open your tombs,” **is paralleled in the third line of Matt 27:51-52, “And the tombs were opened.” But the Ezekiel passage continues: "And I will bring you up out of your tombs, and I will lead you into the land of Israel. Then you shall know that I am the Lord." in 27:53 the fulfillment of the rest of the Ezek passage: "And having come out from the tombs, . . . they entered into the holy city [of Jerusalem]." the last clause “and they were made visible to many,” from Isa 26:19 : "Those in the tombs shall be raised, and those in the land [or on the earth] shall rejoice."
. In apocalyptic language and imagery borrowed from Scripture he teaches that the death of Jesus and his resurrection (“raising”) marked the beginning of the last times and of God’s judgment…

from this analysis, it should be clear as to why it was not mentioned by Luke or Mark who were writing to the Gentiles who had no idea of any of this. It would not have been relevant to their literary purposes.Matthew, on the other hand, was writing to Jews using Jewish scripture.

Isn’t it sad that such a great event went on untold and unexplained anywhere else, even in Mattew in detail, about some people who could be the most authentical witnesses for the truth of cross and resurrection event to the gentiles, pagans and to the whole mankind till end of days? Or is it again, prophecy historyfying by simply putting a note that something so and so happened?

 

[inJESUS]

Isn’t it sad that such a great event went on untold and unexplained anywhere else, even in Mattew in detail, **about some people who could be the most authentical witnesses for the truth of cross **and resurrection event to the gentiles, pagans and to the whole mankind till end of days? Or is it again, prophecy historyfying by simply putting a note that something so and so happened?

the people who wrote the gospels, themselves, were eyewitnesses and you don’t believe them. So why would you believe about people *they *talk about if you reject the cross *they *talk about? why would you accept it if Matthew and Luke and John talked about it yet you reject the same 3 for writing about the crucifixion?
understand that no one questioned the crucifixion. It is gnostics who gave a gnostic interpretation that Muhammad adopted.

 

[Ella]

Luke
Chapter 16
“There was a rich man 13 who dressed in purple garments and fine linen and dined sumptuously each day. 20 And lying at his door was a poor man named Lazarus, covered with sores, 21 who would gladly have eaten his fill of the scraps that fell from the rich man’s table. Dogs even used to come and lick his sores. 22 When the poor man died, he was carried away by angels to the bosom of Abraham. The rich man also died and was buried, 23 and from the netherworld, 14 where he was in torment, he raised his eyes and saw Abraham far off and Lazarus at his side. 24 And he cried out, ‘Father Abraham, have pity on me. Send Lazarus to dip the tip of his finger in water and cool my tongue, for I am suffering torment in these flames.’ 25 Abraham replied, ‘My child, remember that you received what was good during your lifetime while Lazarus likewise received what was bad; but now he is comforted here, whereas you are tormented. 26 Moreover, between us and you a great chasm is established to prevent anyone from crossing who might wish to go from our side to yours or from your side to ours.’ 27 He said, ‘Then I beg you, father, send him to my father’s house, 28 for I have five brothers, so that he may warn them, lest they too come to this place of torment.’ 29 But Abraham replied, ‘They have Moses and the prophets. Let them listen to them.’ 30 15 He said, ‘Oh no, father Abraham, but if someone from the dead goes to them, they will repent.’ 31 Then Abraham said, ‘If they will not listen to Moses and the prophets, neither will they be persuaded if someone should rise from the dead.’” (emphasis mine)Amazing how relevant this parable is to the whole discussion.

 

[Charlie_Zeaiter]

Isn’t it sad that such a great event went on untold and unexplained anywhere else, even in Mattew in detail, about some people who could be the most authentical witnesses for the truth of cross and resurrection event to the gentiles, pagans and to the whole mankind till end of days?

:yup:
I agree. And it bothers me too.

Or is it again, prophecy historyfying by simply putting a note that something so and so happened?

… from this analysis, it should be clear as to why it was not mentioned by Luke or Mark who were writing to the Gentiles who had no idea of any of this. It would not have been relevant to their literary purposes.Matthew, on the other hand, was writing to Jews using Jewish scripture.

That could be an interesting explanation.

Luke
Chapter 16
… 31 Then Abraham said, ‘If they will not listen to Moses and the prophets, neither will they be persuaded if someone should rise from the dead.’" (emphasis mine)Amazing how relevant this parable is to the whole discussion.

Another interesting explanation.

Thanks for an interesting thread.

 

[Isa_Almisry]

Isn’t it sad that such a great event went on untold and unexplained anywhere else, even in Mattew in detail, about some people who could be the most authentical witnesses for the truth of cross and resurrection event to the gentiles, pagans and to the whole mankind till end of days? Or is it again, prophecy historyfying by simply putting a note that something so and so happened?

How could they be a witness to the Cross?

They were DEAD at the Crucifixtion.

Matthew clearly states that they came into the city AFTER His Resurrection. So no witness there either.

The idea was those who were alive who saw the Cross, the Resurrection and the dead come back could connect the dots.

 

[Khalfan]

the people who wrote the gospels, themselves, were eyewitnesses and you don’t believe them. So why would you believe about people *they *talk about if you reject the cross *they *talk about? why would you accept it if Matthew and Luke and John talked about it yet you reject the same 3 for writing about the crucifixion?
understand that no one questioned the crucifixion. It is gnostics who gave a gnostic interpretation that Muhammad adopted.

I don’t believe them, because I don’t have any clue, who wrote them. You never been able to provide that either. then comes the second consideration, what they wrote. All they wrote about crucifixion. Did Islam or any muslim ever said crucifixion never happened? We don’t deny the crucifixion. They indeed saw ‘Jesus’ on the cross. We all know Jesus (pbuh) wasn’t a willing partner in the cross event. Wouldn’t God help him to be saved as he prayed for? We think God did just that. If that concept were there among some ‘gnostics’ even before Mohamed (pbuh), we can’t blame them since that was a possibility which God confirmed in the Quran.

 

[LSK]

I am confused by your question - Jesus, as God, was not praying to be saved. He was quoting a psalm that all good Jews would have recognized. By doing so He was reminding them that He was fullfilling the prophecy of the promised Messiah.